Why do some creationists think evolution = atheism?

[Jenny Collins]

Yes, consensus can be wrong. But the consensus of experts is much, much less likely to be wrong than the opinions of a non-expert. This is especially true in those areas where extensive testing has been done over the last century or so. The places where experts are most likely to be wrong are those where testing has not been done or where there is controversy in the field.

When it comes to evolution, there is essentially no controversy among the experts. Furthermore, the concepts have been extensively tested. In that case, it is very likely the experts are correct.

Where do you live? Here in the USA there is indeed controversy about evolution, and some of these so-called experts are so smart that they are dumb! They are so in love with their own voice and so driven by pride, that they use established scientific facts, but mix in their imagination! They start from the wrong premise and build on that! Majority can be wrong in science too, and the public is brainwashed!

The consensus back in the 1800s from these educated minds was the now dismissed phlogiston theory, and they thought they were at a time when they had arrived too! If you would have pointed out mistaken ideas from the 1700s to them, they would have said "Yeah, but we are so knowledgeable now!"

Evolution is no doubt much bigger than the phlogiston theory was, but the whole world is much bigger too!

I don't remember if you are atheist, but for all of the believers out there, the Bible says "The wisdom of the world is foolishness with God" and also says: "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" It doesn't say: "Only a small portion is being deceived by God" but the "whole world" and also calls him the "ruler of the world" He is that wily old serpent who is a master manipulator! And he is laughing at us all! He finds us hilarious!

 

[sayak83]

Maybe I was mistaken about a few who aren't atheists, but then I am even less impressed with their belief in evolution, particularly if they believe the Bible! Because the Bible is NOT compatible with evolution! I have been studying the Bible for 40 years, I know! If the Genesis account of Adam and Eve is not literal, why is Adam always listed first in the lineage to Jesus? Why is Adam referred to as a real person later in the Bible as well?

Even many atheists who have read the Bible, will tell you it is not compatible with evolution

Well, Christianity is wrong then. Since I am a scientist, I am as certain that evolution is true as I am certain that the earth is round, having carefully assessed the evidence for it and the pitiful arguments against it. In fact, any capable scientist not driven blind by faith based ideological blindness will see that that, as 99% of scientists do, regardless of their faith. So if your beliefs require you to disbelieve evolution, then you have based your life on a false faith. My condolences.

 

[Jenny Collins]

Who is this Immortal Flame? I blocked her from interactions on another post and now she has followed me here! I clicked on "ignored content" and it was him or her, whichever! I am not even going to check out what that one is saying! Hope that one doesn't follow me stalk me to other posts

 

[Jenny Collins]

Well, Christianity is wrong then. Since I am a scientist, I am as certain that evolution is true as I am certain that the earth is round, having carefully assessed the evidence for it and the pitiful arguments against it. In fact, any capable scientist not driven blind by faith based ideological blindness will see that that, as 99% of scientists do, regardless of their faith. So if your beliefs require you to disbelieve evolution, then you have based your life on a false faith. My condolences.

Appeal to majority! "Three out of four dentists like Crest" Well maybe the one who dissents knows something! If you are a scientist, I don't know! Just like I may not be an artist according to Thumper, although I don't know what my claim to drawing has to do with the subject of evolution?

You are of course correct that the Bible would need to be abandoned to believe evolution! Hear that you religious folks? You cannot have both, only tell yourself that you can!

If you were religious I would tell you that the majority of the scientists are deluded because Satan is running this circus on earth! "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" He doesn't just sort of run the world, he is master of it and manipulating people

 

[sayak83]

Appeal to majority! "Three out of four dentists like Crest" Well maybe the one who dissents knows something! If you are a scientist, I don't know! Just like I may not be an artist according to Thumper, although I don't know what my claim to drawing has to do with the subject of evolution?

I am a scientists and I do know. You can too, if you are willing to put aside the biases caused by your current faith and truly seek to learn. At the end of the day, the choice to walk with knowledge or to walk in ignorance lies with you. I have seen that you hide your dogma of faith in the cloak of personal ignorance. But that is poor excuse. It is upon you to determine what is or is not true through honest investigation. The beliefs that really matter to you, you should be able to oppose or defend them by your own capabilities of discernment, rather than depending on what others say. Otherwise, its other people's beliefs you are mimicking without understanding or insight

You are of course correct that the Bible would need to be abandoned to believe evolution! Hear that you religious folks? You cannot have both, only tell yourself that you can!

Of course not. Its your current types of beliefs about what the Bible is or says that needs to be abandoned. The beliefs of Christians who find evolution and science to be completely compatible with the Bible have as much legitimacy as your own.

If you were religious I would tell you that the majority of the scientists are deluded because Satan is running this circus on earth! "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" He doesn't just sort of run the world, he is master of it and manipulating people

It is typical of religious groups who present a false doctrine of reality and God to say that the entire world and all its authentic knowledge and wisdom are lies and conspiracies. I am religious, but I do not subscribe to this narrow Christian doctrines of sin and conspiracy of Satan. The world of matter and senses provide as much access to truth as the worlds of reason or spirit.

 

[Jenny Collins]

I am a scientists and I do know. You can too, if you are willing to put aside the biases caused by your current faith and truly seek to learn. At the end of the day, the choice to walk with knowledge or to walk in ignorance lies with you. I have seen that you hide your dogma of faith in the cloak of personal ignorance. But that is poor excuse. It is upon you to determine what is or is not true through honest investigation. The beliefs that really matter to you, you should be able to oppose or defend them by your own capabilities of discernment, rather than depending on what others say. Otherwise, its other people's beliefs you are mimicking without understanding or insight


Of course not. Its your current types of beliefs about what the Bible is or says that needs to be abandoned. The beliefs of Christians who find evolution and science to be completely compatible with the Bible have as much legitimacy as your own.


It is typical of religious groups who present a false doctrine of reality and God to say that the entire world and all its authentic knowledge and wisdom are lies and conspiracies. I am religious, but I do not subscribe to this narrow Christian doctrines of sin and conspiracy of Satan. The world of matter and senses provide as much access to truth as the worlds of reason or spirit.

first of all, you are relying what other people tell you! Secondly, you don't really think that everybody knows all there is to know about science and they all are at the same level! There are people who will tell you that they believe in evolution and they know LESS than I do! Everyone in some way, has to some extent rely on those with more knowledge but they choose their teachers wisely! You are a scientist, but there are scientists that depart from what you claim!

And there is no dogma to do with my beliefs, in fact the Pew Report says we are the most well read Biblically, pray the most, attend meetings the most, religiously we are very astute!

The Pew Report also says we have the least college attenders, and that is because we don't seek money and high paying jobs, and avoid the college atmosphere of bad influences! Of course the Pew Report doesn't mention Amish who clearly don't attend college! But even so, the Pew Report says that we have the highest amount of high school graduates, less drop outs, and lots of us opt for tech school!

Our publications are filled with history and science articles, current events, etc Our organization has a science department who volunteer, likely retirees or those who leave prestigious jobs to volunteer their services! There is something about scientists who volunteer that promotes honest science! No competition, no agenda to win prizes, get names in books, etc

Don't compare yourself against me, because I would have to compare you against the likes of Frantisek Vyskocil and the others!

The Bible is NOT consistent with evolution!

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

He is a scientist who came from mainstream thinking and changed some views, so defected from wrong mainstream ideas!

Mainstream means majority, just as one time the now discredited phlogiston theory was mainstream! At one time the theory of evolution was on the fringes and NOT mainstream!

But today it is, which was my claim among other things.

Ad populum is appeal to majority to prove something is correct! What majority believes is not always an indicator of what is true!

It's a logical fallacy everybody should try to avoid

My mentioning Vyskocil is because I read an interview about him in my religious magazine, the Awake! Our magazine has articles with many doctors and scientists who have abandoned evolution! They did not start out as disbelieving evolution, they started out believing as you do! JWs do not have creation colleges, if there is a scientist who is a JW, he most likely did not start out as a JW! And likely believed in evolution at one time, so he wasn't molded from day one to believe creation!

Why do I appeal to these scientists and believe them? Because their explanations make sense when I read them! Have I considered the other side? Yes, from web sites like this! I am not impressed!

I know why you lean on a particular type of resource. They agree with you. It's natural to make such choices.

But my beliefs are not centered around the theory of evolution

Good thinking. Neither are mine. It's not much of a foundation for anything.

I do not believe that evolution is consistent with the Bible, but that still doesn't believe that I don't consider science when studying this issue! I hear the science arguments from all sides and while there is a lot of talking that is over my head, I do recognize some basic arguments in favor of the views that evolution is false! I am just not as immersed in untangling all of the details, and from what I understand, the evolutionists battle each other over details too! If they don't understand the details, can they fault me?

People will judge the quality of your opinions by the quality of the data base of facts and values you bring to the discussion, and how you process them to arrive at conclusions. Our only credentials here are our words and their power (or lack thereof) to persuade.

[/QUOTE]Instead of putting people like Dawkins on a pedestal, I put his and my creator on a pedestal and believe his words that "the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God"[/QUOTE]

Pedestals are overrated.

 

[Jenny Collins]

But today it is, which was my claim among other things.



It's a logical fallacy everybody should try to avoid



I know why you lean on a particular type of resource. They agree with you. It's natural to make such choices.



Good thinking. Neither are mine. It's not much of a foundation for anything.



People will judge the quality of your opinions by the quality of the data base of facts and values you bring to the discussion, and how you process them to arrive at conclusions. Our only credentials here are our words and their power (or lack thereof) to persuade.

Instead of putting people like Dawkins on a pedestal, I put his and my creator on a pedestal and believe his words that "the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God"[/QUOTE]

Pedestals are overrated.[/QUOTE]
I don't care if people will judge my opinions! For some reasons you think I care that all of you think I am a pea brain! I know I am not and think I have shown that I have intelligence on here!

I really am getting burnt out from all of this, and am going to quit coming to this post! I feel like deleting my profile because I am sick of arguing and some of the insults, but the only way you can lose your account is if you get kicked out! I am going to quit looking at notifications

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If I have to question Vyskocil's interpretations- who I do know is a highly regarded scientist- then I have to question the people claiming to be scientists on here and what they tell me! I know Vyskocil is a scientist! I don't know that the people here are!

A scientist whom I debated, once questioned whether he truly disbelieved evolution, because she claimed she couldn't find much about him on the internet! She thought that people were using him to claim he rejected it, when he didn't! That is the only time an evolutionist alleged that! It would be pretty risky for invent an interview with a living person and claim he said stuff, he didn't! That would leave us open to lawsuits!

Other religions that normally hate JWs quoted him in their magazines! They of course left off the part about him being a JW!

Anyway, this scientist lady told me that she thought he was really an evolution believer who was being lied about, because she had no way to confirm otherwise! She said she would try to contact him and when she did, he wouldn't respond! To her that was further evidence that what I was saying was nonsense! He probably didn't have time to respond and was bombarded with messages! He is world renowned!

You question why I put faith in what Vyskocil says, but you want me to put faith in what the people in this forum say? They clearly know something about science, use King's English, have some sophistication in the way they speak! And maybe some or all, of them ARE scientists! But maybe they graduated at the bottom of their class, for all I know!

On Yahoo Answers a real obnoxious guy was laughing at me over the issue and put forth some science argument to baffle me! Later I repeated that to others who then laughed at me because what he said was wrong! And they believed evolution too!

Then there were the scientists who got in an online argument with each other and I was the one who started it! Here is what happened: I know that most scientists believe in global warning from greenhouse gases, but there are a minority who believe it is natural cycles!

Well on this site, all of them ganged up on me about the subject of evolution and used their badge of expertise! I did an experiment! I submitted a question about global warming and the scientists who presented a united front against me, started debating each other! And here is the other thing: I had told one of them that the science world have frailties motivated by agenda, and glory seeking! They wanted to get their names in books, get attention and prizes! She told me how science was so careful and the other scientists quashed that from going to far and tainting the scientific method!

Well another scientist proceeded to get in an argument with her over that, and he said I was right about that, how it had a strong presence in their world, and he told me: "Jenny, if you want to disbelieve evolution, you go ahead! But I am going to take issue with her (the other scientist) over what she said about this other issue" He did the arguing for me against what she had tried to insist with me

Vyskocil's being a scientist isn't relevant. It doesn't make him authoritative in the area of evolutionary science. His opinions there carry no more weight than yours or mine.

There is also no debate about anthropogenic climate change among that set of experts. It's now just a matter of sitting back and watching man cook the earth. He apparently lacks the will to prevent that.

 

[Shad]

Appeal to majority! "Three out of four dentists like Crest" Well maybe the one who dissents knows something! If you are a scientist, I don't know! Just like I may not be an artist according to Thumper, although I don't know what my claim to drawing has to do with the subject of evolution?

That isn't an appeal to authority popularity as at no point was a theory claimed to be true because X people believe in it. Rather it was blatantly obvious that sayak83 looked at evidence and arguments making their own conclusion.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

T

Tell that to the evolutionists who snicker: "Why do creation believers say we come from apes?" Then insist it is a strawman, and that we share a common ancestor as apes! Some creation believers truly think evolutionists say we are descended from apes, and ask why apes still exist! Others use the term apes loosely and get picked on! I always say evolutionists claim we descended from apelike ancestors! Now you say we descended from apes and are apes! Wouldn't it be nice if people shut up about word arguments, swept away that clutter, and just stick to the point? Or didn't make it personal and tell people they are dumb? Then the opponent spends time defending themselves, and not defending their position?

The idea that man is an ape needs no defending. The dissention is coming from nonscientific sources.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

If the only scientists entitled to an opinion are evolutionary biologists, and the rest of us poor slobs (joke) are at loss to understand it, that means there is a group of great individuals at the very top who are telling the rest of us what to think!

Who's telling you what to think? Scientists aren't theologians.

all the rest of us are incapable of figuring things out, how do we know that the evolutionary biologists are right! None of us understand the stuff! It can be compared to a cult if that is the case! The leaders at the top are all knowing, and the rest of us have to accept that!

Feel free to believe what you like and to teach your children the same. My children appreciated it. They are both in the sciences, and are happy to have a large portion of the population unqualified to compete with them professionally.

look at medical doctors! There are general practitioners and there are specialists! Although one is specialized, it doesn't mean that the general practitioners are clueless! They know medicine and while not being as specialized, they work together with specialists when they refer their patients to them!

And it is the same with science! It is divided into different specialized areas, but it doesn't mean that the other scientists are clueless about making decisions! And they are related enough to give some validation to having an opinion about evolution! It isn't like contrasting a hair dresser with a figure skater

Science doesn't recognize, "general practitioners." Nobody considers you a scientist for having a BS degree.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

for all of the believers out there, the Bible says "The wisdom of the world is foolishness with God" and also says: "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" It doesn't say: "Only a small portion is being deceived by God" but the "whole world" and also calls him the "ruler of the world" He is that wily old serpent who is a master manipulator! And he is laughing at us all! He finds us hilarious!

Why should anybody believe any of that?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Who is this Immortal Flame? I blocked her from interactions on another post and now she has followed me here! I clicked on "ignored content" and it was him or her, whichever! I am not even going to check out what that one is saying! Hope that one doesn't follow me stalk me to other posts

Good idea. You offered no defense against that poster's claims.

 

[Deeje]

By examining the morphology of the fossils. It's the exact same technique scientists use today to accurately predict the physical appearances of decayed human bodies.

No I'm sorry, that doesn't wash for me. 'Assuming' that something is related doesn't mean that it is. You assume that apes and humans are related but I will argue that there is a great chasm between apes and humans. If you assume that the bones you find are human then you will dress those bones in human form, but if the bones were really apes, then the dress code would change dramatically.

No, but singling out one fact and asking it if "proves" a relationship is like looking at me and my father and saying "So you both have the same colour hair, but does that PROVE that you're related?". No, of course it doesn't. What's convincing is the abundance of other evidence and how it call comes together to indicate a very specific conclusion.

I don't find the "other evidence" very convincing either....sorry.

No, it isn't, because they could have been created in any form whatsoever. Unless you believe each one of the species in the above sequence appeared, fully formed, from nothing and then disappeared entirely for no reason whatsoever, and was then replaced by the miraculous appearance of a somehow very similar species. It simple makes no sense. If that's how God designs things, God is clearly an idiot.

I'm afraid that the Creator did not provide detail of what he created specifically beyond their "kinds". Saying that "they could have been created in any form whatsoever" is actually saying you know what God had in mind to do even though he didn't tell anyone. He didn't need to give us details or a specific order, because he was going to let us discover many things for ourselves.

Ecclesiastes 3:10-13:
"I have seen the burden God has placed on us all. 11 Yet God has made everything beautiful for its own time. He has planted eternity in the human heart, but even so, people cannot see the whole scope of God’s work from beginning to end. 12 So I concluded there is nothing better than to be happy and enjoy ourselves as long as we can. 13 And people should eat and drink and enjoy the fruits of their labor, for these are gifts from God."

So what makes you think that the process God used to "tweak" his prototypes wasn't evolution? That would make perfect sense.

Because evolution does not require God to be the Creator who made specific creatures at specific times and in a specific order. I will take him at his word, not preferring the musings of imperfect men with limited knowledge over the word of my all-wise and all-knowing Creator.

So you believe God put tremendous physical labour and pain into creating life? So you believe God is not all-powerful?

The Bible likens God's creative work to giving birth. It was "work", involving his enormous power and energy which is demonstrated in the size and design of the universe, so I don't think he is lacking in any respect.

It appears as if God must fit into a box of your own creation....I assure you he will demonstrate his power again in the future.
He fits in no box made by man.

 

[Polymath257]

Where do you live? Here in the USA there is indeed controversy about evolution, and some of these so-called experts are so smart that they are dumb! They are so in love with their own voice and so driven by pride, that they use established scientific facts, but mix in their imagination! They start from the wrong premise and build on that! Majority can be wrong in science too, and the public is brainwashed!

The consensus back in the 1800s from these educated minds was the now dismissed phlogiston theory, and they thought they were at a time when they had arrived too! If you would have pointed out mistaken ideas from the 1700s to them, they would have said "Yeah, but we are so knowledgeable now!"

Evolution is no doubt much bigger than the phlogiston theory was, but the whole world is much bigger too!

I don't remember if you are atheist, but for all of the believers out there, the Bible says "The wisdom of the world is foolishness with God" and also says: "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" It doesn't say: "Only a small portion is being deceived by God" but the "whole world" and also calls him the "ruler of the world" He is that wily old serpent who is a master manipulator! And he is laughing at us all! He finds us hilarious!

First, the phlogiston theory went out before 1800.

Second, when the phlogiston theory was popular, there were no alternative explanations around to compete with it. THose developed as the phlogiston explanation failed to agree with observations.

Third, for evolution, there has always been the competing religious viewpoint.

Fourth, that competing viewpoint has been tested and doesn't agree with the observations.

So your analogy isn't valid.

If you reject the observation of the world as the key to knowledge, then you reject the scientific method. You are free to do so, but then you up the claims that your views are scientific at all.

I would also point out that going *back* to the creationist or ID model would be similar to going back to the phlogiston theory of heat. Those models were considered and rejected 200 years ago.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

but then I am even less impressed with their belief in evolution,

Good thing I don't believe in evolution then. No more than I believe in germs or gravity or magnet fields.

If the Genesis account of Adam and Eve is not literal, why is Adam always listed first in the lineage to Jesus?

It's contained within the Bible. The Bible makes the claim that Adam was the first person. Why should he not be listed first in Jesus' lineage in the Bible?

Why is Adam referred to as a real person later in the Bible as well?

Why are Gilgamesh, Achilles, and Anubis referred to as real entities/people? Such a question can be asked of all religions in regards to their characters and books.

Even many atheists who have read the Bible, will tell you it is not compatible with evolution

And yet many Christians say it is.

but scientists are not as dissimilar as a plumber and auto mechanic, do you follow the logic there?

An astrophysicist and neuroscientist are about as different as the plumber/auto mechanic. One studies the physics of the cosmos, the other studies neural pathways and communications in the brain and throughout the body. I'd go to the astrophysicist to explain black holes to me, while I'd have the neuroscientist explain the damage studies into curing paralysis.

By the way, I am sure that most scientists have also studied biology! My friend who drives a truck, studied biology in college

An intro college biology class gives someone general knowledge of the field, but it does not make them an experienced or schooled biologist.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

OK, what is the real evidence in the fossil record....?

For "Lucy" the actual bones found are highlighted in brown...the rest is made up.

This is Lucy without the reconstruction...

Impressive, is it?

And this is Pakicetus

The shaded parts are the actual remains...the rest is filled in with imagination, assuming that Pakicetus was even related to whales.

Here are some whale fossils....

Now, depending upon whose imagination was evoked by those bits of bone, here Pakicetus can be drawn like this....

or this

It is assumed that whales evolved.....over millions of years.

Do you see the remotest resemblance between the first and the last in this series of images? Did Darwin observe the Galapagos animals and birds as anything other than what he saw on the mainland, but with adaptations that allowed them to survive in a more marine environment? Did he see any of them "morphing" into something else?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist)

And what about Timurlengia euotica? The red bits indicate the actual fossil remains.

Are you seeing what I am seeing? How much actual science is used in evolution compared to how much is assumed and suggested? If there were no diagrams and illustrations based on those suggestions, how would the fossils tell their own story?

According to the Davidson Institute, whole intact skeletons are very rare.....

"Regarding the number of skeletons found to date – this is a great question since the number of complete components is relatively small (the average dinosaur has about a hundred different bones). Currently it is estimated that around 2,100 “good skeletons” have been found, and the number of known species is several hundred (300-500). Therefore, even without an entire skeleton, but with other skeletons from the same species, we have a good chance of completing the full picture. In addition, researchers often rely on the bone structure of contemporary reptiles and birds, which are the descendants of the dinosaurs and therefore their distant relatives."

Have any fossilized whole skulls of dinosaurs ever been found?
So evidence wise, you'll have to forgive me for being skeptical.

Pointing out incomplete examples of individual skeletons gets you nowhere and ignore the vast number of fossils we have and the techniques applied to understand exactly how they create a complete picture. Like I said earlier (and you ignored), it's exactly the same technique modern forensics use to accurately predict the appearance of decayed human remains.

Don't blame science for your inability to see anything beyond potential gaps.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No I'm sorry, that doesn't wash for me. 'Assuming' that something is related doesn't mean that it is.

Didn't say we "assumed" anything.

You assume that apes and humans are related but I will argue that there is a great chasm between apes and humans.

Then your argument is demonstrably wrong, because humans ARE apes.

If you assume that the bones you find are human then you will dress those bones in human form, but if the bones were really apes, then the dress code would change dramatically.

So you're alleging a vast scientific conspiracy to misrepresent these bones and that thousands of the world's experts in the field of archaeology and paleontology are in on it. Do you have any evidence of this?

I don't find the "other evidence" very convincing either....sorry.

I doubt very much that you have objectively considered it (or even that you are aware of the vast majority of it).

I'm afraid that the Creator did not provide detail of what he created specifically beyond their "kinds". Saying that "they could have been created in any form whatsoever" is actually saying you know what God had in mind to do even though he didn't tell anyone.

No it isn't. In fact, it's doing the exact opposite - it's NOT assuming. Your'e one who determines that God MUST have made things a particular way, despite the fact that any all-powerful God COULD have made things ANY way.

He didn't need to give us details or a specific order, because he was going to let us discover many things for ourselves.

Like how we discovered evolution.

Because evolution does not require God to be the Creator who made specific creatures at specific times and in a specific order.

So? That doesn't mean God didn't participate in, guide or even start the process. The theory of gravity also doesn't require a God. If your faith in God is genuine, then why is it so difficult for you to imagine God's hand in a natural process functioning in such a way that is not directly evident or even apparent? If God exists and nature is the expression of Gods will, then how come evolution can't merely be a facet that expression?

I will take him at his word, not preferring the musings of imperfect men with limited knowledge over the word of my all-wise and all-knowing Creator.

Since you already stated that God "Idid not provide detail of what he created specifically beyond their "kinds", you have no basis on which to judge "His word" on matters of creation.

The Bible likens God's creative work to giving birth. It was "work", involving his enormous power and energy which is demonstrated in the size and design of the universe, so I don't think he is lacking in any respect.

But you said it took tremendous effort. If God is literally all-powerful, how would it take ANY amount of effort for them to achieve anything?

It appears as if God must fit into a box of your own creation....

No, I'm judging the God you speak of by the box YOU put them in. I have no concept of God.

I assure you he will demonstrate his power again in the future.
He fits in no box made by man.

Including yours, which appears to be a very small box indeed that is shrinking by the day, especially if you need to deny facts to preserve it.

 

[Thumper]

Appeal to majority! "Three out of four dentists like Crest" Well maybe the one who dissents knows something! If you are a scientist, I don't know! Just like I may not be an artist according to Thumper, although I don't know what my claim to drawing has to do with the subject of evolution?

Hey, you're the one who brought up your art ability, right after claiming that people on these forums make up all kinds of stuff about themselves. I just pointed out the hypocrisy. Sorry if that bothered you.

You are of course correct that the Bible would need to be abandoned to believe evolution! Hear that you religious folks? You cannot have both, only tell yourself that you can!

So you are saying that your god could not have used evolution to create our modern biota. What a small god you worship.

If you were religious I would tell you that the majority of the scientists are deluded because Satan is running this circus on earth! "The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one" He doesn't just sort of run the world, he is master of it and manipulating people

A demon infested world is why people laugh at you.

Look, you have complained about "defending" your position against the onslaught of people on here. But you've really spent all your time on here denying what others try to explain, not defending any position. You have never really defended your position.

You should realize that even if you could somehow find enough gaps in evolution, that does not in any way automatically make creationism right. Any other concept would have to stand on it's own.

So why not actually try to defend what you believe to be true about biology?

Tell us all how your understanding of how biology works can be used to advance our ability to improve human healthcare? Medicines? Biologicals? Procedures? Anything?

How about how your understanding of biology can improve crop resistance and yields to help feed the world?

Or do you even see these are important goals for biological research?